There's a lot of discussions these days about dual core processors and how they are necessary to handle today's mobile operating systems. But, is that the truth or just some marketing hype?

I know that Windows Phone is optimized to run on a single-core processor and most of the workload, is given to to the GPU, not CPU. Therefore, the perceived speed of a Windows Phone device is usually much higher than the same apps running on an Android or iPhone.

Additionally, many dual-core devices do nothing more than run down the battery faster and in some cases, drain it really fast. Additionally, there's not many games or apps presently optimized for dual-core processors, so they're really not be utilized.

Anyway, here's a great article discussing this topic specifically in regards to Windows Phone, but also makes some good points to consider for Android and iPhone. I think it's very interesting because the article is written by an Android user.

8 Replies

I know going from an iPhone4 to a 4S definitely made everything run smoother. Not sure what the MHz difference really is (I've seen several differing reports), but the new CPU definitely sped it up. Same going from the iPad to the iPad2 (that was a more dramatic difference).

I have to agree, and lean towards the "marketing hype" side. Will it make a difference if said OS is optimized for multiple cores? Sure. But are most apps right now written that way? I doubt it. Heck, how long have we had multiple core processors in PCs and applications still don't take advantage of the extra processing power to this day.

But it certainly helps with multitasking - on my machines I can specify that a VM has access to one core, and I know that it won't be able to use up any other cores - they are free for other processing. I know in iOS that's a bit different, but I do know that opening and closing programs quickly on my iPhone4 would make it drag, but I can have lots of programs running on the iPhone and it keeps chugging. Works well for using multiple apps to look things up while reading :)

But it certainly helps with multitasking - on my machines I can specify that a VM has access to one core, and I know that it won't be able to use up any other cores - they are free for other processing. I know in iOS that's a bit different, but I do know that opening and closing programs quickly on my iPhone4 would make it drag, but I can have lots of programs running on the iPhone and it keeps chugging. Works well for using multiple apps to look things up while reading :)

Yeah, I can see the multitasking part, and agree with you there. In the instances where you can specify which cores and app can and can't use, multicore is excellent. How many apps and OSs are optimizing all of that on the fly for you, though? More of a rhetorical question, really, but something I'm curious about for sure.

The real bottleneck on phones is memory access, not processor. Just like on PC's, the bottleneck tends to be drive access.

Having said that, Windows phones using more GPU than CPU just means that it's using the GPU (in some cases, dual GPU's) like a CPU, so it is, indeed, acting like a dual-core CPU already. So to say that they don't need dual cores is silly.

No, most apps are not optimized for dual cores, but it would allow more more multi-tasking on the devices. But it's not going to be screaming fast while doing it because it's still going to be limited by the I/O channels available. Using DDR2 or DDR3 is probably going to have more impact than a second core on the processor.

One of the interesting things I heard about at the last VMWorld I attended was the idea that folks were working on VMs for smartphones. Not for running a computer OS on a phone, but as a solution for the problem of IT having to deal with consumerization and putting business tools on workers' personal property.

The concept being that currently one has to give a user's personal phone access to company resources through an app or apps that mix with the rest of their personal junk, and loss/theft/termination requires a wipe of the entire device, which can cause political/legal/security troubles of its own. There's also the problem of diversity between mobile OS's, hardware, etc.

If instead, there was a way to deploy a limited and secured VM of a mobile OS or mini-virtual-appliance to a consumer phone, then your company data is insulated from the device owner's personal data, and the VM can be managed/secured/wiped entirely separate from the consumer side of the phone. A virtualization layer would also allow for easier deployment, standardization, and management of the required mobile tools on any number of devices.

I think this might be a very good thing. But I also think that it's going to require one processor for personal use and one processor for this virtualized business tool set, especially if it's going to multitask, do background updates while the consumer OS is in use, etc.

I've heard that VM on the phone rumor too...would love to see it come to life.

I forgot, for REAL hype, see the old box for the AT&T Tilt - it had the dual core claim years ago, and in a technical sense it was, but if I remember the tech documents correctly, it was something like one core was for the radio processing and one for the actual phone (I'm probably wrong on the actual application, but something along those lines).